OPEC

Anyone wondering what the reason for today's dramatic gold price dump is, look no further than South Africa, where we learn that after nearly two months of endless strikes in the metals and mining complex, the country - the world's fifth largest producer of gold - is nowhere nearer to restoring its mining output. This of course means that less and less gold will hit the market. Which in centrally planned and regulated markets, means gold will collapse far more than the 1% so far, and likely close limit down, with Bernanke's compliment (don't worry that none of this makes logical sense: Heidelberg toner cartridge did a hostile take over of logic long, long ago).

It seems our recent re-introduction of the world to Robert Triffin has struck a note among a number of market participants. The gold-convertible U.S. dollar became the global reserve currency under the Bretton Woods monetary system, which lasted from 1944-1971. This arrangement ended because foreign central banks accumulated unsustainably large reserves of U.S. Treasuries, threatening price stability and the purchasing power of the dollar. Today, central banks are once again stockpiling massive Treasury reserves in an attempt to manage their currency values and gain advantages in export markets. We have, effectively, returned to Bretton Woods. The trouble is, as Guggenheim's Scott Minerd notes,  that the arrangement is as unsustainable today as it was during the middle of the last century. None of this should come as a surprise given the unorthodox growth of central bank balance sheets around the world. The collapse of Bretton Woods in 1971 caused a decade of economic malaise and negative real returns for financial assets. Can anyone afford to wait to find out whether this time will be different?

One of the more curious conspiracy theories that has appeared in the past 24 hours, or since yesterday's so far unexplained crude oil flash crash without a subsequent corresponding jump (those only happen in equities it appears), is that Saudi Arabia has decided to come to the aid of the Obama administration two months ahead of the election, and to pump enough crude into the system to offset the pricing in of the inevitable liquidity tsunami from the now global QEternity, or at least until such time as the election passes. Partially confirming this speculation was the FT's report that Saudi Arabia has offered its main customers in the US, Europe and Asia extra oil supplies through the end of the year, a sign the world’s largest exporter is worried about the impact of rising prices on the global economy. Reuters adds, citing a Gulf source that "We would like to see the price coming down and we are working to bring it down... The price now, we believe is high, and it's not supported by fundamentals at all. It's just speculation and geopolitics." "The majority of OPEC countries prefer around $100, including Saudi Arabia," he said, adding that $100 per barrel was "right now the ideal price for the majority of OPEC countries ... the majority is all except one or two." "We think the oil market is well balanced," the Gulf source added. This comes a day after fellow OPEC member Iran, whose output has been substantially curtailed in recent months as a result of a global embargo (with notable exemptions for key Iran clients India and China) made it clear that it would be happy with crude rising to $150 for obvious reasons. Obviously Iran is in the "minority" according to the Gulf source. And while the reasoning for Saudi Arabia to do all in its power to promote amicable relations with America's leadership is easily explainable, it is far less clear if Saudi Arabia can actually do much if anything to really prop up crude production, prop down the price of crude and gas at the pump, and support Obama's reelection chances.

Equities traded lower in Europe today as market participants continued to book profits after a rally to 13-month highs on growing concerns that even though the Constitutional Court in Germany will dismiss the injunction, it may enforce certain conditions. In addition to that, yesterday’s comments from Spain’s Rajoy who said that the new ECB backstop makes a bailout for his country less urgent. As a result, there is a risk that markets may scale back their expectations of an imminent full-scale bailout and in turn lead to another speculative attack on Spanish bonds. This, together with touted profit taking, saw the short-end in Spain and Italy come under pressure (2y Spanish yield up 8bps and 2y Italian yield up 7bps). In turn, this supported duration assets throughout the session. Looking elsewhere, the looming elections failed to deter investors from the latest DSL tap, which drew a record low yield. Going forward, the second half of the session will see the release of the latest Trade Balance data from the US, as well as the weekly API report. In addition to that, the US Treasury will sell USD 32bln in 3y notes.

• Germany says U.S. debt levels "much too high" (Reuters)
• Netanyahu ramps up Iran attack threat (Reuters)
• Burberry plummets by most ever, slashes guidance, rattles Luxury-Goods Industry as Revenue Growth (Bloomberg)
• FoxConn Again Faces Labor Issue on iPhones (NYT)
• Southern whites troubled by Romney's wealth, religion (Reuters)
• China's Xi not seen in public because of ailment (Reuters)
• Another California muni default: Oakdale, Calif., Restructuring Debt, Planning Rate Raise After Default (Bond Buyer)
• Spain's PM expects "reasonable" terms for any new aid (Reuters)
• Bernanke Proves Like No Other Fed Chairman on Joblessness (Bloomberg) - Ineffective like no other?
• John Lennon’s Island Goes on Sale as Irish Unpick Property Boom (Bloomberg)

Now that oil’s price revolution – a process that took ten years to complete – is self-evident, it is possible once again to start anew and ask: When will the next re-pricing phase begin? Most of the structural changes that carried oil from the old equilibrium price of $25 to the new equilibrium price of $100 (average of Brent and WTIC) unfolded in the 2002-2008 period. During that time, both the difficult realities of geology and a paradigm shift in awareness worked their way into the market, as a new tranche of oil resources, entirely different in cost and structure than the old oil resources, came online. The mismatch between the old price and the emergent price was resolved incrementally at first, and finally by a super-spike in 2008. However, once the dust settled on the ensuing global recession and financial crisis, oil then found its way to its new range between $90 and $110. Here, supply from a new set of resources and the continuance of less-elastic demand from the developing world have created moderate price stability. Prices above $90 are enough to bring on new supply, thus keeping production levels slightly flat. And yet those same prices roughly balance the continued decline of oil consumption in the OECD, which offsets the continued advance of consumption in the non-OECD. If oil prices can’t fall that much because of the cost of marginal supply and overall flat global production, and if oil prices can’t rise that much because of restrained Western economies, what set of factors will take the oil price outside of its current envelope?

So what's driving these high ass oil prices? Fundamentals, paper pushing derivatives, fraud, or fear? A common sense discussion ensues...

Gold’s seasonality is seen in the above charts which show how March, June and October are gold’s weakest months with actual losses being incurred on average in these months. Buying gold during the so-called summer doldrums has been a winning trade for most of the last 34 years. This is especially the case in the last eight years as gold averaged a gain of nearly 14% in just six months after the summer low. We tend to advise a buy and hold strategy for the majority of clients. For those who have a bit more of a risk appetite, an interesting strategy would be to buy at the start of September, sell at end of September and then buy back in on  October 31st. 

The real damage came before the actual announcement as like most things on Wall Street inside information runs rampant when so much money is involved.

With a price hovering around $1,600 an ounce and the prospect of "additional monetary accommodation" hinted to in the latest meeting of the FOMC, gold is once again becoming a hot topic of discussion. Krugman, praising 'The Atlantic's recent blustering anti-Gold-standard riff, points to gold's volatility, its relationship with interest rates (and general levels of asset prices - which we discussed here), and the number of 'financial panics' that occurred during gold-standards. These criticisms, while containing empirical data, are grossly deceptive.  The information provided doesn’t support Krugman’s assertions whatsoever.  Instead of utilizing sound economic theory as an interpreter of the data, Krugman and his Keynesian colleagues use it to prove their claims.  Their methodological positivism has lead them to fallacious conclusions which just so happen to support their favored policies of state domination over money.  The reality is that not only has gold held its value over time, those panics which Krugman refers to occurred because of government intervention; not the gold standard. Keynes himself was contemptuous of the middle class throughout his professional career.  This is perhaps why he held such disdain for gold.

The biggest geostrategic change of the past decade overlooked by Washington policy wonks in their fixation on their self-proclaimed “war on terror” is that Latin America has been throwing off the shackles of the Monroe Doctrine. These ignored developments may well soon refocus Washington’s attention on the Southern Hemisphere, as Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez reorients his country’s to China. So, where does Washington go from here? If it wants to preserve its increasingly tenuous foothold in a nation with the world’s largest oil reserves, it might begin by engaging in some honest diplomacy.

The Organization of Petroleum Economies, in its August report, said Iranian crude oil production in part led to a decline in overall output from the Vienna-based cartel. OPEC said crude oil production for its members, not including Iraq, was reported at 28.1 million barrels per day in July, a decline of 270,000 bpd compared with the previous month.  The decline in OPEC oil production in part was led by Iran, which saw its export options curtailed by sanctions imposed by the U.S. and European governments. Tehran announced it still had a viable consumer base in China, however, which received about 12 percent of its oil needs from Iran. The Indian government, meanwhile, said it would circumvent EU sanctions by extending government-backed insurance to tankers carrying Iranian crude because of the "definite need" for oil.

• 'Pussy Riot' band members found guilty (Al Jazeera)
• Merkel Says Germany Backs Draghi’s ECB Aid Conditionality (Bloomberg)
• Now, the reverse psychology: Hilsenrath: Fed 'Hawks' Weigh In Against More Action (WSJ)
• London Firings Seen Surging As Finance Firms Add NY Jobs (Bloomberg)
• Facebook Second-Worst IPO Performer After Share Lock-Up (Bloomberg)
• Kocherlakota Says FOMC Goes Too Far With 2014 Rate Pledge (Bloomberg)
• China Said to Order Action by Banks as Developer Loans Sour (Bloomberg)
• Australian Treasury Dismisses AUD Intervention Calls (Dow Jones)
• Brevan Howard Loses Third Founder As Rokos Said To Leave (Bloomberg)
• Japan eyes end to decades long deflation (Reuters)... for 30 years now
• Ex-Morgan Stanley Executive Gets Nine Months in China Case (Bloomberg)

Think the US has it bad with its "soaring" gas price, which is now back to $3.75 per gallon? Think again. Here, courtesy of Bloomberg, is a list of the countries whose gasoline cost puts what Americans pay at the pump to shame. In order of descending gas prices, below are the 20 places in the world where one does not want to "fill 'er up."

With the presidential elections fast approaching, the last thing the incumbent wants is for the one thing that can spoil the party - a surge in oil, and thus gas prices - to happen. Which is why despite a sharp return in Iran/Syria war rhetoric, we doubt that the trade off between a "wag the dog"-type transitory war euphoria and $5 gas will be an accretive one for the administration at least in the short-term. Others who certainly would prefer to avoid the record $140 WTI prices seen just before the Lehman collapse are the majors, where margin contraction can only be offset by very finite end-demand destruction. Yet there are those who not only would like to see a surge in oil prices, but in fact need it, to preserve their viability. Chief among them: Iran. Because according to a just released analysis by the Arab Petroleum Investments Corporation, the price at which oil (read Brent) must trade for Iran's budget to balance has soared to $127/barrel, the highest among all OPEC members, $20 higher than 2 years ago, and about $17 higher than the Friday closing price. And far more dangerously, the APIC study has also found that the cartel (which after last year's fiasco in Vienna is anything but) breakeven price has soared from just $77 two years ago to a whopping $99/barrel. Which means that any and every deflationary plunge in oil prices will inevitably be met with a supply collapse or else OPEC members are in danger of pricing themselves right into fiscal insolvency, and economic collapse.